South Australian bureaucracy claims to be a Model Litigant! Bollocks!!

Wednesday morning, tuned to ABC radio, I was intrigued as I listened to Matt Abraham and David Bevan lock horns with the South Australian Attorney-General (now, Deputy Premier) Mr John Rau.


My morning was relatively peaceful. Breakfast was good. My granddaughter’s first birthday the next day. Cat strolled past and flicked her tail.

All was fine until I heard Mr Rau utter two words, MODEL LITIGANT. In that same breath, he stated that The Crown, as in, I suppose, the Crown Solicitor’s Office, conforms to a Model Litigant policy. Mind you, in all my years of interfacing with these people, I have never, ever seen a document purporting to be thee Policy. Every other state has one. Google it!

As many will know, I have not enjoyed good health for some time, since leaving the public service. But, I have learned how to recognise ‘my moments’ and how to manage them.

The more I listened to this interview, the more livid I became.

So, what does Model Litigant mean? Here are a few pieces from the New South Wales Policy:

‘......The obligation to act as a model litigant requires more than merely acting honestly and in accordance with the law and court rules. It also goes beyond the requirement for lawyers to act in accordance with their ethical obligations. Essentially it requires that the State and its agencies act with complete propriety, fairly and in accordance with the highest professional standards....’

‘..... where it is not possible to avoid litigation, keeping the costs of litigation to a minimum, including by not requiring the other party to prove a matter which the State or an agency knows to be true, and not contesting liability if the State or an agency knows that the dispute is really about quantum...’


‘....Not taking advantage of a claimant who lacks the resources to litigate a legitimate claim, not relying on technical defences unless the interests of the State or an agency would be prejudiced by the failure to comply with a particular requirement...’


‘...... apologising where the State or an agency is aware that it or its lawyers have acted wrongfully or improperly.....’

Let me put the State Government to the test.

In 2004, after several years of blowing the whistle on sexual harassment and workplace bullying, within Mister Rau’s own portfolio, self-represented I caused a trial to be conducted in the District Court by the Equal Opportunity Tribunal.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/sa/SAEOT/2004/1.html

Whilst the sexual harassment claims were prominent, my focus was on the Court determining that the bureaucracy sat back on its fat arse ignoring my complaints for years. The Justice Department was simply validating the bullying and the harassment, by doing nothing.

I am happy to say the findings of the Tribunal totally vindicated my position. I was very, very pleased!

I was again in Court, last September. Same idea. I said one thing, in defence, the government said another.

Those two court cases have a common thread. Obviously under instruction from the government agency, the Crown Solicitor’s Office was to convince the Judge I was a liar, that I tended to re-write history, and that I was a man with questionable motives.

So, how did they go about trying to discredit me? Specifics.

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TRIBUNAL 2004.

I was in the Witness Box for two days. It was savage. The Crown lawyer hit me with accusation after accusation. Some of them downright bizarre. Absolutely nothing to do with the case itself. Just good old-fashioned mudslinging. I am a strong person, but I took one helluva pummelling those two days. It was bad.

The night before the case began, the Crown lawyer and THE BULLY and the CEO of Public Trustee called my star witness to the executive boardroom. She called me in tears that night. I had lost my witness. Infer what you may.

Unfortunately, for the government, anything they thought achieved by that pummelling did not make it to the Determination handed down 25 June 2004. Although the sexual harassment allegations did not hold water, TECHNICALLY, I certainly got what I wanted. Proof the government lied. Proof I was not a bullshit artist. Proof they damn well knew about the bullying, about the harassment! The government agency, Public Trustee, was found to be vicariously liable for the actions of an employee.

DISTRICT COURT 2010

Same crap! Only this time, it was downright gutter tactics. The Hearing was one of Administrative Law. Leading up to court day, there were several Preliminary Hearings. That was a hoot! From memory, the majority of my requests for discovery were, yeah, just ignored. Yet, each time Crown wanted something, it was pistols at dawn stuff!

A few days before day one, I had a conversation with the Crown lawyer. Nice guy, only doing his job, I guess. He made it very clear to me that providing I did not introduce any new evidence, it would be a 10-minute in & out affair. We hand up or read out our statements. Home in time for lunch.


Well, as I walked into the courtroom and up to the Bench, the tomes of material he had strewn across that bloody great big bench puzzled me.

He put me in the Witness Box.

That was in the morning. Sometime after four, I slid out. Yep, just like in 2004, he did his best to convince the Judge I was a liar, and a re-writer of history. He introduced paperwork I had never seen before. Paperwork from years prior. Sitting in that box, my brain went into meltdown. I got confused. I was upset. But, hey, he was only following instructions. I had been ambushed.

BACK TO THE MODEL LITIGANT POLICY

If the elusive South Australian Policy is anything like that of the NSW Policy, I hope you draw the same conclusions. Is Crown a Model Litigant?


In my second case, I had my sickness insurance entitlements withheld due to an alleged pre-existing condition non-disclosure back in December of 2002.

During Preliminary Hearings, Crown did agree with some of my allegations: that my insurance form had been filled-in by counter staff, that there were no policies or procedures for counter staff, that many of the staff were contractors. HOWEVER, they did not agree with me when I said I had told the staff member all of my medical history.

Hell, but that was why I went there in the first place. This government superannuation manager does not have any medical questionnaires. The form has one question, and asks you to report what you think, in your past, may cause you to become disabled in the future. Too bad if that freckle does turn out to be cancer many years later.

Well, they did a great job of ambushing me. Of deceiving me. Crown Law lied to me. I was set-up. But, hey, I have lodged an Appeal with the full bench of the Supreme Court. Give it another shot. Be more alert this time.

So, give me a verdict. Did Crown behave as a Model Litigant?

Dear Attorney-General Rau.

With the greatest of respect, I must disagree with what you said on ABC891. Moreover, if you are even half the man I believe you to be, you will seek time with me. I have been and I remain a victim of a very cruel and adversarial system that is entrenched within the public service.

As a taxpayer, well, if I ever get a job again, you should want to hear it from my side. From one of many  who has been through eleven years of hell. Years of no one wanting to help me. Years of bullying, victimisation. Years of ill health. Years of frustration with an employer who deserted me, who now is screwing me, all over again!

You have the findings of Judge Rice. You have the findings of the Alan Moss Inquiry. You have the findings of the Parliamentary Inquiry. Vindication. Vindication. Vindication.

And, do you want to know how it all started? Back when I was a normal person, a great father, a good husband. All I did, one day in March of 2000, was to say to the CEO; “That new guy is touching himself in front of staff members.”

This is nothing to do with law, with legislation, or with policy. This is to do with the truth. And, certainly in my experiences, truth is the first casualty in this adversarial system we call justice. A Model Litigant? I do not think so!

This is The Bank calling.....your payment is 5 minutes late!

I might be wrong, but since the Banks reduced various fees, such as late fees, I have been getting calls the day after the monthly payment is due.

Used to get a letter, or even better a note on the Statement a few weeks later.

This happened this morning. It is fair dinkum, and I have rushed the story out before I forget the details.

My phone rings:


ROB: Hello.

BANK: Is this Robert Mckibbin?

ROB: No. This is Rob McKibbin.

BANK: Rob McKibbin? Can I speak to Robert McKibbin please?

ROB: No.

BANK: No?

ROB: No. I’m Rob McKibbin. But you can call me Robert.

BANK: Robert, can I confirm your date of birth please?

ROB: What’s yours?

BANK: What?

ROB: What's your date of birth?

BANK: But I need your date of birth.

ROB: Me too.

BANK: I need to verify your identity.

ROB: Me too. You could be anybody mate. A nutjock. A cuckoo. A bloody terrorist. Anybody.

BANK: I am calling from the Bank.

ROB: No you’re not. You're calling from India.

BANK: I am calling from the Bank about your account. This is urgent.

ROB: Don’t care. I don’t know you. I’m not giving you my personal details.

BANK: Robert, can I have your date of birth please?

ROB: Yours first please.

BANK: Robert. I need to discuss your account.

ROB: I don’t. What is your phone number.

BANK: Robert, I am calling from the Bank and I..........

ROB: Look mate. I don’t know who you are. You have told me jack shite about yourself. I'm gonna hang up. You are so rude.

BANK: Robert, I need to verify your date of birth.

ROB: I’m not sure which particular word you don’t understand, BUT, I’m bustin for a crap, I got the hangover from hell, and I don’t need some pinhead calling me up in the morning wanting to know when I was born. Adios.

CLUNK

Better check to make sure that thirty-eight bucks went through!

Workplace Bullying: Do employers have strategies to avoid stress claim payouts?

You feel you have no option other than the Workcover option. You have fought the workplace bully for what seems like an eternity. However, the problem remains. And, you get sicker with each passing day.

Whatever management says it is doing, is not working. Your doctor pulls the plug. Anxiety, depression, adjustment disorder...irrespective of the term, you are sick.

It was a gut-wrenching two years and seven months from my first complaint to my stress claim. Then I persisted with my war for a further six years before I felt compelled to resign.

As in my case, here in South Australia, the process begins with a Workcover Prescribed Medical Certificate (PMC) from a General Practitioner. This is what you attach to your Workcover Claim Form.

BOTH documents will detail your medical condition. Both will detail THE ALLEGED CAUSE.

And that, my friends, is when your worst unsuspected nightmare goes supersonic.

Put yourself on the management throne. By signing off on the Claim, legitimacy attaches to your declaration that your illness is directly linked to workplace bullying.

And if all goes your way - you actually survive - the only thing you have left to prove, in any legal arena, is that management sat back on its arse, as in my case, doing what it is very good at...nothing!

In my old workplace, the bully (now proven to have been a bully by a subsequent Disciplinary Inquiry) was one-down from the CEO. The Big Kahuna Number Two, the self-appointed deity who signed-off on EVERYTHING!

I was buggered, right from the get-go. It was like soliciting Caesar for a life membership of the RSPCA.

That sign-off does not happen overnight, or in the week after, or in the month after, or.........

The South Australian Public Service AND the inept State Government created my experiences. The department I toiled for, the Office of the Public Trustee, an agency under the Attorney-General’s Department umbrella, was and still is a self-insured entity.

The only good thing I have to say about the self-insured position, is that I avoided being managed by one of those independent, profit-driven insurance companies. From all accounts, that was a godsend, in relative terms anyway.

In my case, I was sent to a Psychiatrist of my employer’s choosing. Moreover, the report from that employer-paid-for expert was a medico-legal report. It was NOT a medical report. There is a difference. And, if you ever wind up in a witness box, you will realise the report was not obtained to help you, the injured worker.

N.B. You have the right to obtain a report from a specialist of your choosing.

Now, getting back to my legitimacy attachment comment. Even though co-workers were managing me, the process was, for the sake of better words, both backbreaking and stress making.

It was as though that much-needed sign-off was as elusive as fluffy ALF returning from Melmac looking for another garage to crash through.

It was as if my employer was being guided by some secret document. A ‘How to avoid stress claims’ type document.

Do such documents exist? HELL YEAH!

Not for the first time, I received one such document yesterday. Prepared by a Law Firm for a government agency. It needs to be read a few times in order to transform your mindset from that of an injured worker to that of a bushwhacker.

When I first read it, I could not quite get my mentally damaged psyche around it. I was looking for the benevolent bits. I was assuming the needs of the employee were a consideration on some level, any level.

Then it struck me. The guide I was reading has nothing to do with the wellbeing and the interests of the worker. The guide is the 2011 version of the 15th century Malleus Maleficarum, the Witch Hunter’s Bible.

Because, I’ll tell ya, you feel like you’re being led to the bloody stake as you wind your way through the sea  of constantly popping-up obstacles on a ‘Talking Heads’ road to nowhere.

After my employer received the first psychiatric report, management was pissed. Human Resources, at the request of Big Kahuna Number Two, yep, the bully himself, penned a response letter asking the Psychiatrist to RECONSIDER his findings!

I HAVE THAT LETTER. Yep, my employer, a government agency within the Department of JUSTICE!!!

The Psychiatrist said NO!

I have that response, and it sure does make interesting reading. I got the impression Sigismund 'Sigmund' Schlomo Freud was wondering what planet he was communicating with.

Now folks, back to the nefarious employer Stress Claim Avoidance Manuals (SCAM) I mentioned.

Here are some tantalising extracts from a few of the documents in my possession:

‘...obtain the necessary information if you later want to claim an exemption from the statutory requirement to provide ‘suitable employment to the worker...’

‘...obtain the necessary information required to dismiss the worker for incapacity in a legally effective manner...’

'...Dismissal by reason of disability is not unlawful if the worker is unable to perform their duties due to their disability...'

And,

‘...if a private sector company and a Government department were found to have breached their safety duty for the same issue, the private company could be fined or prosecuted but the government department would be issued with a Notice of Non Compliance...’

I think it necessary to say that I do not believe all employers behave nefariously. I have knowledge of an  employer that dealt with the bullying problem decisively, and assisted the worker towards a full recovery.

Well...I know of one case.

Over the past few weeks, I have helped some people, people targeted by workplace bullies, people who are sitting at the crossroads, the same t-junction I found myself back in late-2002.

I turned right and filed a stress claim. I could have turned left, walked, and saved myself years of grief.

You are not the only one who will suffer. Factor in your family.

My best word of advice? HEALTH! Do not take on a system that is hell bent on self-preservation. Do not hop on that white horse if you know your health is on wobbly legs. It will not be worth it. Walk away. They are not worth it.

And, do yourself a huge favour. Google the word whistleblower. I doubt you will find a whistleblower who still has employment, who still has sanity, and who still has the life that was enjoyed before taking on the devil.

It is a cold world my friend. Take on bullying and the system, and it becomes a lonely world. Think carefully.

But.....would I do it again?     HELL YEAH!

How effective, how diligent is the South Australian Equal Opportunity Commission.

According to the website, http://www.eoc.sa.gov.au/, one of its three mandates (information, education, assessing & resolving complaints) is ‘...Our complaint handlers assist people to reach an agreement if a complaint of discrimination or harassment is made. We do not act as advocates. Our aim is to bring people together to try to resolve the complaint. If a complaint cannot be resolved, it may be referred to the Equal Opportunity Tribunal...’

By its own admittance; a dog without a bark, a snake without venom, a tiger missing a few molars.

How effective is this well-oiled machine. From the 2010 Annual Report:

‘...satisfaction with the conciliation process remains high on the part of both complainants and respondents...’

‘...will continue to deliver valuable services to help protect South Australians against unlawful discrimination...’

‘...Over the past year 59% of complaints within our jurisdiction were resolved through conciliation...’

‘...Eighty five percent of conciliated outcomes involved the respondent making an apology or providing another undertaking to the complainant...’

How effective? Let’s put it to the test. In fact, let’s deal with specifics.

ACTUAL COMPLAINT FORM.

For years, I have assisted workplace bully targets with filling-in the Complaint Form. You see, if you don’t get it right, I assure you, it WILL come back and bite you in the bum.

On Thursday, 24 March 2005, at 4.08pm, I lodged a completed Complaint Form claiming I was being victimised for having lodged a previous complaint of sexual harassment on 26 February 2003.

The Equal Opportunity Tribunal in the District Court, to my satisfaction, had dealt with that previous complaint, the 2003 complaint. However, had the Commissioner dealt with it appropriately, Court action would not have been necessary.

Be aware that under the legislation you are permitted to lodge a victimisation complaint provided you can link that behaviour to a previous EOC complaint.

AND, also be aware that if the Commissioner brushes aside your complaint, you do have the right to request it be referred to the Equal Opportunity Tribunal within the District Court. I had to do that!

On page two of my 2005 complaint, I named, in section A, the Office of the Public Trustee as the organisation I was making a complaint against.

On page two of my 2005 complaint, I named, in section B, an Executive Officer of the Office of the Public Trustee I was making a complaint against.

The Form clearly states: ‘...I am complaining about:...’, and ‘...I am also complaining about:...’

WHAT HAPPENED

What struck me as bizarre from the onset, was that Public Trustee staff trotted across the way to the EOC and sought (and got) assistance with putting together a response to my complaint. Eh???

Can you imagine: "Hi, this is Joe from Joes Chip Shop. You guys sent me this complaint asking for a response within 21 days. Can you help me put it together?'.


During December of 2005, a conciliation conference had been organised by the EOC and attended by me and a proxy for the Public Trustee. Note: the Public Trustee, the ‘...I am complaining about...’ bit.

An agreement was signed. I was happy to release the organisation from my grip.

It was around this time I was sent home, apparently for my own safety. A full-on investigation began, immediately, and for the next three years, everything hit the fan. Investigations, Inquiries, and then a Parliamentary Inquiry.

During all of this time, albeit somewhat distracted, I continued to wait for the EOC to address the other part of my complaint, the ‘...I am also complaining about...’ bit.

On 18 July 2007, I wrote to the then Commissioner, Ms Linda R Matthews.

I received a response dated 26 July 2007. It said:

‘...I refer to your letter of 18 July 2007 requesting information about the progress of complaints against Ms Cath O’Loughlin (the then Public Trustee) and Mr X (I won’t shame the poor bugger anymore) of the Public Trustee...’

‘...I do not have any record of a request to consider your complaint against any individual respondents other than the Public Trustee, nor do I understand that you asked for your complaint to be considered against individual officers...’

MY BEWILDERMENT

I really, really, really hope I am not the only one bewildered here. It is possible that Ms Matthews was in wind-down mode as she drifted toward her exit from the EOC in 2010. Who knows!

One thing I do know, with absolute certainty, is that Ms Matthews was wrong!

The only question worthy of an ask is; ‘WHY?’

It is worthy of mention that there are plenty of media-reported cases of small business operators copping it fair & square for a helluva lot less than the years of crap I went through in the public service.

Should I mention that the EOC, the Public Trustee, the Attorney-General’s department, the State Ombudsman, the Government Investigations Unit, et al, all live inside the Department of Justice tepee?

CONCILIATION AGREEMENTS

From my experience, not worth the paper they are written on. I had an agreement I signed-off on in December of 2005. It included a date for my return to Public Trustee, hopefully after the investigation was over.

On 30 November 2006 I wrote; ‘...the 12-month assignment, as per my Settlement, expires in less than a fortnight...’ In other words, tally-ho, get my desk ready.

Four hours later, a response, ‘...you will not be returning to Public Trustee...’

Not long after I contacted the EOC. I wanted that Agreement enforced. Ooppss...sorry, no can do. The tootthless tiger had spoken.

So much for Conciliation. So much for the EOC.

The three mandates? Maybe just stick to Information and Education. The rest just doesn’t work, well, not for me!

Something GOOD my government has done!

Well, my story about the goings-on with HousingSA shot my Blog hits count into interstellar orbit, after it featured in an on-line media edition.

From the thousands of hits, there was ONE email I received, someone who took a potshot at my gloominess, my negativity, my....whatever!

OK. For a change, then, I though I would Post a story highlighting something really, really good the current Labor Government has done for it's people....
















Good story?

HousingSA. Police Prosecutors. Special Needs tenants. Fiction V Reality

SCENARIO.


As reported in my previous Post, in support of my friend, I fronted up to Holden Hill Magistrate’s Court last week. Pre-Trial conference (PTC).

Courts are clogged. Any day of the week, click through to the Cases List on the http://www.courts.sa.gov.au/ web site. Particularly the suburban courts.

Looking at the array of charges, I wonder why they actually get to court, get past the PTCs. After all, is that not the purpose of the PTC?

To prevent the pipes from becoming clogged up? “Hey, Mister Prosecutor, I am guilty, can we make this quick? Sorry for what I did. Won't do it again.”

And, why so many adjournments? Having supported many poor bewlidered souls, first time Courtees, all on the Legal Aid hurdy gurdy, I have wondered about that...why all the adjournments! Why did her lawyer ask for so many adjournments?

How does it work behind the scenes? Lawyer, one appearance. Lawyer, one fee? Second appearance...

My friend has no legal representation. However, the issue is straightforward. A neighbour dispute. No violence. Just a lot of bluster between two HousingSA tenants.

With the PTC drawing closer, on her behalf, I wrote to the Prosecution Branch, Holden Hill Police Station. We only wanted an appointment prior to the PTC. Why?

FICTION

Our request was in accordance with the advice below. Llifted off the Courts administration web site. The interesting bit begins with; ‘...Prior to the PTC...’

Information about PTCs for self-represented litigants.


What is a PTC?


The Magistrates Court Rules require parties to proceedings to be ready to proceed to trial by the date of the hearing at which a trial date is set. Once a trial date has been fixed it will not be postponed unless there are very good reasons


Rule 8 and Rule 26 set out what is meant to happen before a matter is listed for trial.


This should be complied with as much as possible before the PTC.


Why has your matter been listed for a PTC?


To make sure that parties have complied with this rule and are ready for a trial date to be set, you are required to attend a PTC to find out:-


· Can the matter be sorted out without a trial; and


· Sort out what evidence will need to be given, whether some of the evidence can be agreed and other matters to make the progress of the trial easier; and


· If a trial is needed, find out how long the trial will take and set a date that is convenient to the parties and witnesses.


How long will the PTC take?


A PTC will usually take between 5 and 20 minutes.


What am I required to do or bring?


Prior to the PTC you should make contact with the prosecution unit to discuss the issues fully and frankly. Their contact details should be on the court documents that were given to you.


Examples of the sort of thing that should be discussed with the prosecution before the PTC date so that the prosecution can consider it before the PTC:-


· any evidence of alibi (you could not have committed the offence because you were somewhere else at the time);


· any documents which may assist your defence;


· tell them your version of the events, including what witnesses you have and what you think that they will say


The Magistrate will need the co-operation of both parties to attempt to resolve your matter.


You must attend the PTC. If you do not attend either personally or by a solicitor you may be found guilty and a penalty imposed in your absence.


If you are on Bail you must attend or a warrant may be issued for your arrest.


Your witnesses do not need to come to the PTC.

http://www.courts.sa.gov.au/community/going_to_court/index.html


REALITY

As Meatloaf said by the Dashboard Light...stop right there!

First up, my friend was and remains under the impression she has no representation. I agreed with that when I read the letter from the Legal Aid-financed law firm's Finance Manager that clearly stated, some months ago, that unless a payment was made immediately to their office...adios amigo!

That was why, I thought, I was doing the right thing, by the book, writing to the Prosecutor seeking an appointment. Then having not heard back, I telephoned. THAT one-way conversation was a hint of things to come!

Waiting outside Courtroom 2, last week, my friend was approached by, presumably, a lawyer. Now known, by us, as a lawyer from the firm that sent the ‘Dear John’ letter last year.

I was only a few feet away when he approached. However, It became evident I was but an apparition. I must have been as he was transmitting messages to me, via her.

According to Mr Lawyer, my letter, and my 'we-have-not-heard-from-you' telephone call, both to the Prosecutor, had PISSED HER OFF! I was not to approach her, the Prosecutor, ever again. Admittedly, I had a foreboding of this when she zoomed past us earlier, despite her saying she would come speak with us prior to the 2.15pm death march. Admittedly, we could have been hard to notice. We were the only ones there, bar some other poor bugger a distance away.

In my very, very, very best irish-english, I laid out the story from my friend’s viewpoint, and asked for an appointment. That is all we wanted. An appointment. A conversation. We were simply following the Courts Authority directions.

Besides, the defendant was and still is INNOCENT!

The Magistrate’s Court web site says: '...you should make contact with the prosecution unit to discuss the issues fully and frankly...'

I was confused. When I spoke to the Prosecutor a few days before, she had no idea what I was on about with regard to the Court web site. The extract above. I kept referring to it. I think she became annoyed.

She had no time for me. It was one of those conversations when you know you would have more chance strking up a two-way with a Mongolian Yak complete with a lisp. She took a couple of breaths between long, repetitive sentences, sentences about how I cannot represent someone. I got sick to death of saying that all I did was write a bloody letter seeking to tee up an appointment for the still-innocent defendant.

Anyway, this lawyer, who appeared out of somewhere, waltzed away, spoke with the Prosecutor, reappeared a few minutes later, and declared the matter would proceed to trial, in May. When my friend, the mother of my gorgeous granddaughter told him a couple of salient facts, I heard him say; "I didnt know that!"

Poor Mrs X was then called in to the Courtroom, reappearing a few moments later.

‘Rob. I don’t know what happened. That lawyer said nothing. I was handed a slip and told to return in May for a trial”.

So, let me see if I have this one worked out.

Someone, anyone (in this case, a HousingSA special-needs tenant), can call the police, say that you shouted and raised your fist, you get arrested, taken to a faraway station, you get charged, albeit months later, you go through various adjournments and you don’t know why, the lawyers drop you, you do as directed by Courts, the prosecutor doesn’t want to know you, and then you’re off to trial!

WHAT THE HELL?

Is it any wonder disadvantaged people out there are disillusioned, pissed off and getting crankier by the day?

Minister Rankine. Your people have known about the troubles caused by this group of special-needs tenants for a very, very, very long time.

Your ‘inability’ to nip these now festering issues in the buds has created this mess, a mess for a ‘good tenant’ who has only ever wanted one thing...fore the idiots in the street to leave...her...alone!

Going to Court is a bloody trauma. This young mother is consumed by stress, by worry, and by total bewilderment.

Hell, so am I!

Where to from here? Well, I have spoken with a lawyer. I have spoken with Legal Aid. I have spoken with Courts administration. I have spoken with the police. And we now have one for the books...we all agree. Well, except for the one that matters...the Prosecutor.

More hours of time involving so many people. When all the Prosecutor had to do was abide by what the Courts administration tells the rest of us to do.

Mister Attorney-General. Mr Rau. YOU ARE the local member for this young mum. You need to step up to the plate and, as I have asked you to do before...sprinkle some common sense over it.

I am quite certain the battle-weary, factory production line Judges have had a gutful. Can we not see to it that the system everyone talks about is at least followed by the very people we pay to protect the community?

Oh. A small, fleeting thought. I can but wonder how that lawyer would have behaved had I been in my old Attorney-General's Department business suit, and my friend in her sunday best.  Just a passing thought, yeah, I could be wrong...

HousingSA: When is a complaint NOT a complaint? Then there is the police!

I remember arriving in Geelong, March of 1972. We had fled the nonsense that was going on in Belfast, referred to as The Troubles. I was 17 and we had, until then, known nothing different from council estates, public rental housing.

Within weeks, we had a Housing Commission place. Suburb called Corio. A three-bedroom house on a corner block. And it wasn’t bad, though; hot weather was a bit of a challenge. Then, I discovered the great Aussie pub. That’s another story for another day.

Early 1977 I moved across to Adelaide.

A few months ago, I decided to act as a proxy for a HousingSA tenant. She is the mother of our first grandchild, a wee girl with her first birthday next month.

They live in Kilburn. They are literally ringed by three high-needs HousingSA tenants. One, a male, I have posted about previously. He terrorises the street children. He speaks crap, lifts his shirt to expose his nipples, which he then plays with, and does all other sorts of stuff that are just.... not on!

Many mornings from the hour of 4am, another tenant is full-on with her equally challenged son. Screaming obscenities at one another. Objects being bounced off the adjoining wall.

The lady across the road. Even I have made the mistake of making eye contact, albeit ever so innocently. You cop an earful.

And, you do your absolute best to...not engage. Huge ask as the days turn to weeks turn to months.

Incessant.

And please, let me acknowledge the other tenant stories out there that make these issues look like a picnic.

Two things I want to share.

I have discovered that lodging complaints with HousingSA can be, let me see, quite challenging?

Recently, as the proxy, I called HousingSA Modbury to report a serious incident involving the adjoining neighbour. I took the opportunity to raise a discussion about Mr Nippleman, a man who needs to be off the street and away from the children. In my opinion, your Honour.

HousingSA turned the conversation around to a logged complaint made against my lovely granddaughter’s mother concerning the tidiness of her front garden.

Having worked for the government for many years, as an I.T. Consultant, having worked within the Attorney-General’s department for eight years, and having worked closely with three Ministers a very long time ago, I thought I knew how most things worked. Yeah. Right!

Here is the 'untidy' garden in question. Now the fun bit. I called HousingSA.




The first person I spoke to said that the officer investigating the complaint would call me back that afternoon. Nope. No show. I gave it a week, then I called back. I spoke with that officer, person number two, thee 'investigator'. She knew NOTHING about an untidy garden complaint. Later, I called another officer, and she did know of a complaint. Wait for it....ready? The next person I spoke with said there was no such complaint in the system!

I thought it was only booze that rotated rooms.

And, I guess, to really annoy me, the officer refused to take my complaint.Why? Well, I had the full name of the tenant, the fact she lives right across the road, and the Googled geospacial co-ordinates of the house.

BUT, I could not supply the actual house number. Hmmmmm....database queries don't work at HousingSA?

To a more serious issue. After months of random abuse from the special-needs tenantess across the road. After months of occasionally coming home to find the outside water tap full-on. After months of my granddaughter being awoken from her Teletubbies sleep by the screaming of obscenities outside the front door. The good tenant had had a gutful, and screamed back!

That was May of last year. The police arrived a couple of months later and arrested the good tenant. She was charged with common assault, raising a fist. Taken to Holden Hill, interviewed, then left to find her own way home to Kilburn.

We will be at Holden Hill Court this afternoon for a pre-trial conference, with, no doubt, the tenantess from across the road, who insisted on the good tenant being charged. (UPDATE: The tenantess from hell did not front up).

Hopefully, I do not need to tell you what is wrong with this picture.

My best advice to my lovely granddaughter's mother? If the Prosecutor is intent on pursuing this madness, and the Judge goes along with it (UPDATE: Going to Trial), we will trot around the corner to Holden Hill Police Station to lodge a list of complaints against this person.

NEVER, outside of Belfast, have I experienced such bloody lunacy!

HousingSA has known about these problem high-needs tenants for quite some time. In fact, a bloody long time. The Police, is well aware of Mister Nippleman. And, I have lodged a detailed submission to Holden Hill police concerning the street.

The department’s inability to sort these issues out, nip them in the bud before they turn into a festering cesspit, is plainly obvious for all to see.

This good tenant, the mother of my beautiful granddaughter, is stressed out beyond belief. All she desires is for the idiots to leave...her...alone!

So, when is a complaint maybe not a complaint? I guess it depends if you are the goodie or the baddie.

Law. Legal Aid. Lawyers. Cracks in the floor.

You're broke. You've been wronged.

Of course, your sense of ‘being wronged’ is purely subjective, particularly in the eyes of the law.

Your first mistake may be watching way too many television shows where everything is wrapped up neatly in 50 minutes.

No one believes you, but you have a lawyer who bestrides a white horse brandishing a lance that surgically strikes at the heart of the matter.

The good guys win, the baddies lose!

Reality? Sometimes, but rarely often.

South Australia? Think Gilchrist!

Here in South Australia, we have sat in our lounges watching significant legal cases unfold across many weeks, even months on our local news channels.

We marvel at the wizardry of a Queen’s Counsel, as he or she fronts the cameras to explain to the masses how that quirk in the law was used to bring victory to, sometimes, the bad guy.

There’s your Don Quixote. There’s that one you want to sit down with and say; “Mate, I’m broke, I’m honest, and I’ve been shafted!”

Yeah, right!

Under-resourced and under-funded Legal Aid is a factory line for churning out ‘NO’ letters. Hell, you need to be under a real threat of a jail term to squeeze blood from that stone.

Community Legal Centres. Ever seen the same lawyer twice?

And how many times are we confronted by headlines screaming out that some clown has gotten off scot free on a bloody technicality!

In Adelaide recently, two things have unfolded right beneath my snout.

Again I'm stomping the streets looking for a lawyer with ‘front’, a lawyer who will say to me; “Mate, I believe you. And if we let the Government off the hook, how many others will suffer as their civil liberties are stomped on.”

And there is the case of my mate John who was in court last Thursday. I will get to that in a moment.

Of course, I am not stupid enough to suggest carte-blanche day on  lawyers and a full assault on pro-bono services. Pro-bono? Yeah, good luck with that one!

What I am highlighting are the glaring cracks in the floorboards that people fall through every, single day of the week.

In civil issues, we are buggered. Unless you got money, that is.

We don't have the connections to get us through to the Michael Abbotts or the Marie Shaws of this world.

I have been living on the skin of my arse since my had-to departure from the Attorney-General’s department back in 2008.

Over the years, I doubt there is a firm I have not telephoned or not written to with my grievances.

Some actually do get back to you, albeit the receptionist. Most do not even have the courtesy of a return anything.

You see, NO MONEY

Some excuses concern me. “I am sorry Mr McKibbin, but we are on a list of possible providers of legal services to the South Australian government. It would be a conflict of interest”.

Of course, as I discovered, some of those firms had NEVER actually provided such legal services. I can only imagine why some government agencies have so many names on a leashed list.

Anyway, I'm not bagging the profession as a whole. What I am saying is that unless you are charged with a serious crime, unless you have the right connections, unless you have money, and lots of it, you, my friend, simply fall through the cracks.

Justice IS NOT available to all.

Oh. And don’t do what I did recently. DO NOT waste time representing yourself. That highly skilled practitioner of the legal profession, the one to your right, he will crucify you.

They have no feelings for you. Though, personally they might feel sorry for you. However, at the end of the day, they take instructions. Hell, they won't even get in the same elevator as you. It's a whole different world within a world.

And, as in various cases during my years as a whistleblower, those instructions will be to ensure a win irrespective of ethics, of morals, of truth.

Last Thursday, Holden Hill Court House, I supported Adelaide invalid pensioner evangelist John who has had charges brought against him by the state government. His crime? Whistleblowing on Channel 7 exposing the years-long porn email distribution ring at Public Trustee.

Legal Aid sent him a ‘Dear John’ letter. He, like me, is on the bones of his arse. All he can do is seek an adjournment based on looking for legal representation. And he did.

Wonder what the record is for the number of adjournments when you claim that no representation is constitutionally not on?

Been there. Done that. Sometimes it makes more sense (as far as one’s health is concerned) to take a slap on the wrist for something you believe you are not guilty of, put it all behind you, and become more hardened to the society around.

Though, thank heavens Peter Lalor wasn’t like that back at the Eureka Stockade rebellion of 1854.

Anyway, I will continue to seek out my Don Quixote astride that horse. Somehow, I don't fancy my chances fronting up to the full bench of the Supreme Court, manilla folder in hand, attempting to prove that a decision made by a District Court Judge is just so wrong...THAT THE TRUTH DID NOT PREVAIL!

The guy from Crown Law? He was just way too good! The truth took a buggering. Trouble was, I'm no lawyer.

RANN Government. Charges Invalid Pensioner Whistleblower.

One thing I love about being Irish is that I don't give a toss about social status, particularly the standing of Politicians, the ones I don’t like.

After all, are we not all equal?

I think this shot of a recent Irish tabloid, with the Irish politicians in full view, says it all...if only the Australian media (occasionally harping on about the great Aussie larrikinism) took a leaf from this front page!


Here in South Australia, truly, are some fantastic Politicians. They work their arses off!

Not all are useless. BUT, the ones that are...they really, really do it in a big way!

The present ruling Labor Government is as detached from its party founding philosophies as Mongolian Yak is from my dinner plate.

A government that fart arses around with dollars and cents for the needy, but has no problemo whatsoever flashing the multi-million dollar cheque book for an extremely already-rich cyclist, or for some bloody trade show in a town in rural Italy that no one has ever heard of...except for the Premier, and his missus who has a financial interest there.

And before you take a swing at me, yes, I know, the economic benefits. Well, tell that to Mary and her kids living in the back of the family car, whilst HousingSA tells her there are no available houses as it sells 10% off its stock each and every year, and whilst other houses sit vacant for months with blowflys enjoying free rental!

Or, how about the charging of an Invalid Pensioner who blew the whistle on a porn email-ring in the government, just to shove it up him for having the audacity to appear on TV and squawk!

LINK TO VIDEO:
Channel 7, Today Tonight segment. Blowing the whistle on a government porn email ring.

And how out of touch is the RANN government?

My fellow whistleblower, an invalid pensioner, featured in this Channel 7 video, appears in Court this Thursday. The charge is WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORISATION OPERATED A RESTRICTED-ACCESS COMPUTER ...SYSTEM (Section 44(1) of the Summary Offences Act 1953).

Now, I'm no lawyer, and I've only been in I.T. for a tad over 30 years, BUT I am busting to see how the Government intends to play this one out.

As I have said elsewhere, if what we talk about on the show, is the basis of this charge, a charge brought about by John's appearance on TV, I can instantly rattle off the names of dozens of public servants from one government agency alone deserving the same treatment...and that includes those sprung (and confirmed by the Govt) by this whistleblower!

It is a sad day, even in hell, when your elected government turns on the people. In this case, Mister Attorney-General Rau, you need to step up to the plate and sprinkle it with common sense.
 
 I love the Irish word GOBSHITE...particularly when bundled with the word USELESS!!!

Premier RANN. Your Friday morning Tweet draws my ire!!!

Premier Rann.

On Twitter recently you espoused the short term anguish to the long term benefits of your 'tough' decisions.

In Kilburn you have a HousingSA male tenant, a 'special needs' tenant, who has for months been behaving toward the local children in the most inappropriate manner...nipple twisting, sexually charged comments, etc.

HousingSA knows. The police knows.

Each year you sell a percentage of your housing stock, that is policy. You hopefully will understand why you draw my ire in this respect.

http://adelcomp.blogspot.com/2010/12/minister-for-housing-i-will-hold-you.html

Young families who have fled violence, people without homes, and MY GRANDDAUGHTER'S mother who must get out of that street, get away from that bloke no one seems to be able to control...all struggle with your bureaucrat explanations as to why there is no forthcoming assistance.

Methinks you need ONE MORE POLICY ...a policy to immediately assist those in dire strife with assets you got sitting around with blowflies as the perfect tenants!

As I say in another Post, YOU AND YOUR PEOPLE I will hold vicariously liable should anything untoward happen to my 10 month old granddaughter!

 A common law doctrine that renders a person (or corporation) liable for the acts of another despite no personal fault on the part of the first person. The most common form of vicarious liability is the liability of an employer for acts and omission of their employees committed in the course of employment.

Wonder what Minister Rankine would do if you called her and echoed the same story if my granddaughter was your granddaughter...I can see the removalist truck from here!!!

Minister for Housing: I WILL hold you liable for my granddaughter's safety!

My warning to the Minister of Housing, Jennifer Rankine, to the Premier, Mike Rann, and to the bureaucrats of HousingSA.


Vicarious Liability. And, in the improbable case none of you knows what this is:

A common law doctrine that renders a person (or corporation) liable for the acts of another despite no personal fault on the part of the first person. The most common form of vicarious liability is the liability of an employer for acts and omission of their employees committed in the course of employment.

In March of 2004, when the government and the public service bureaucrats sat on their collective arses during the years I was bullied and harassed in their workplace, I took them to court and achieved a court ruling proving that they were vicariously liable.

The Determination of the Equal Opportunity Tribunal was handed down on 25 June 2004.
Link:

District Court Ruling

For the past few months, I have been bringing to the Government’s attention (and to all the bureaucrats beneath) the plight of a HousingSA tenant and her children, one of the children being my granddaughter who is yet to celebrate her first birthday.

The house my granddaughter resides in is literally ringed by other HousingSA tenants, tenants with mental illnesses and mental difficulties.

I feel for these people, as I myself suffered greatly (and continue to do so) from chronic depression incurred during my years of exposing corruption from within the South Australian public service.

I do not condemn these people. The ones I am aware of are suffering and, at times, cannot be held fully responsible for many of their actions.

Certainly, HousingSA does have unenviable challenges. I, and others, can scream from the highest pinnacle when negatively affected by the actions of others, but...what would you do?

Irrespective, my only interest at this point is my granddaughter.

I have witnessed the actions of some of the other tenants, and these actions are extremely disturbing.

I doubt he means harm, but the man who runs around the street chasing children, with his clothes hoisted up to his neck whilst messing with his nipples, distresses the crap out of me, as it does the surrounding residents.

The lady who trespasses on other property, banging on the front door, screaming obscenities, turning on the water tap, then joining-up with the nipple-squeezing man down the street.

To give HousingSA its dues, it has, after investigation, raised my granddaughter’s mother’s category to a level 1 for transfer.

As a transfer, to me, is the only practical solution. Now, the wait.

I have done all the right things. Notified all and asunder. Worked within the framework. Kept my cool. Maintained a consistent rationale.

Now I digress.

As others know, particularly the homeless, more so the women with young children hanging-out in women’s shelters fleeing domestic violence, having a Category 1 status can mean Jack Squat!

Greenwith is a beautiful suburb northeast of Adelaide. I live not far from it.

So tell me, why is HousingSA selling 7 Ninnis Court with an asking price of $300,000?

Sure, no doubt there are reasons. BUT, try to explain those to Mary X currently living in a bloody Ford station wagon with her two toddler children.

Me? I do not give two knobs about the reasons. There is a relatively new home sitting up there in Greenwith being sold off. A home that I am sure a needy family could be moving in to by this Friday.

HousingSA is always selling off stock. And HousingSA has a SWAG of homes dotted around the metropolitan area with nothing but houseflies as tenants. These are indisputable facts!

HousingSA, from all accounts by the official comments to the media, has become more interested in the fiscal management of its business. From my seat, it has swung way too far in that direction, and as a consequence forgotten about and diverted away from its founding intent for our needy.

Dear Minister Rankine. Dear Premier Rann. Dear HousingSA. I put you all on notice.


If anything untoward happens to my 10-month old granddaughter, I WILL sue your collective arses into an oblivion of biblical proportions.

I will hold you all, each and everyone of you, vicariously liable. I have done it before. I will do it again.

You HAVE empty homes. You ARE selling off stock.

I do not care for your reasons.

Even when this dust settles. When my granddaughter is elsewhere. The problems in that street remain. In Minister Rankine's defence, I ask myself what would I do. I don't have any answers. These are complex situations.

BUT, as long as stock is being sold, as long as houses are sitting empty, the Minister is absolutely guaranteed one thing...NO SYMPATHY and certainly NO PATIENCE!

Oh. And an upcoming happy new year Minister. I doubt the homeless will find it any different to 2010.

Other night at the pub, the barmaid poured me the wrong beer.

A Coopers Pale Ale poured instead of a Carlton Draught. The Draught was on special for $3 a schooner, whilst the other was full retail.


Back in the days when pubs were, well, different, that was called a mistake, and irrespective of the price, you scored it for the price of your order.

That was back then.

Today? Down the sink, then the correct one poured. Deal done. Despite me offering three bucks for the mistake, down it went. Down the bloody drain. A disturbing sight to behold.

Culture. Pub culture. Where has it gone?

Certainly here in South Australia, the demise of the publican and the advent of gaming rooms have led to a generation of young people who might never have entertained working in the entertainment business. If that is what pokie rooms are, entertainment.

Years ago you could prop up at the bar, leave your money there as you went to the dunny to do battle with little yellow round things in the trough, and most of the time arrive home with change in the skyrocket.

Remember the meat men who would cruise the bars on a Saturday avo slicing up salami and metwurst for the drinkers? I am now positive my good wife of 30 plus years knew we were not going to squash training at the now defunct Modbury North Squash Club on Milne Road all those Saturdays back then.

Then there were the Sally Army stalwarts with their donation tins. Every Friday night and Saturday avo. Never fail.

And you gotta doof your hat to the excuse board behind the bar. A dollar a session. If your better half called looking for ya, well, you're not there. Pay more, and the excuses dished out by the barmaids just got better.

My pub, my local for the past 20 years was part of the Taverner Group that was taken over by Woolworths.

However, way before that was a publican, Leo.

Leo would occasionally pop in, shout the bar, and every so often toss a few lunch vouchers around.

And if you had a problem, such as a steak served up as an iceberg, Leo would sort. No questions asked.

You try that today.

Without any doubt, the pokie players are well looked after. Try to get a beer when there is someone at the counter looking for twenty in coin. Then you have the free coffees made to order.

Somewhere in all of this, is the social drinker. The lover of the pub. Amidst a culture, an alien culture.

No mistakes. No money on the bar. No staff-understanding of what it means to either place your glass on its side, or, upside down if you are an idiot.

In the good old days, you could crank up a sing-along at the bar. The same group of socialites, week after week. Home away from home.

Today? Nope, not video killed the radio star. Pokies killed the culture.

Pubs are buggered. Well, as far as we old farts are concerned.

There still are a few of us, from the good old days. We huddle together at the same stand-up table, week after week. Yeah, talking about the good old days and how much these days do not make any sense.

Particularly the pouring of beer down a sink!

Woolies...you need to get your act together. Don't confuse beer with all that bread you throw out every night.

What the hell is going on at Public Trustee...again!

Despite many assurances given by Mark Bodycoat to the 2009 Parliamentary Inquiry, ‘Something is rotten in the state of Denmark’. Hamlet 1:4.

http://adelcomp.blogspot.com/2010/03/why-is-there-still-workplace-bullying.html

2007: PUBLIC TRUSTEE CATH O’LOUGHLIN RESIGNS FOR PERSONAL REASONS

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/public-trustee-and-senior-officer-quit/story-e6freo8c-1111113368981


2009: PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
Double-click DOCUMENTS, COMPLETED INQUIRIES, TABLED REPORTS and look for 51st REPORT, PUBLIC TRUSTEE

http://www.parliament.sa.gov.au/Committees/Pages/Committees.aspx?CTId=5&CId=183


EMAIL PORN STREWN ACROSS YEARS, Channel 7, TODAY TONIGHT (uploaded by Family First SA to which I have no affiliation)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSMpmxP4h8U

What has the I.T. Manager been doing? He replaced the previous person, THEN PT EXECUTIVE RECLASSIFIED THE POSITION UPAWAYS WITH A VERY HANDSOME PAY RISE TO BOOT! Yet, still the same number of Network Users, same duties, same work. With around 160 staff members, the PT position  pays handsomely compared to say the Office of Consumer Affairs where at least a hundred more Users lurk, as well as remote offices. Empires all unto themselves!!! The difference in salary is at least equivalent to a couple of people on the dole.

3 SEPT 2010: MARK BODYCOAT DOES AN UNEXPECTED CATH O’LOUGHLIN. TEARS FLOW AT FAREWELL DRINKS.

TEMPORARY PUBLIC TRUSTEE ANNOUNCED WHILST THEY LOOK FOR ANOTHER.

And speaking of illustrious leaders, albeit the blow-in type. Is it true that recently a senior female Jerome Maguire favourite was shipped across from 45 Pirie Street to stand-in for Mark Bodycoat for 4 weeks, but decided to bugger off on 2 weeks leave and left that rickety old rebirthed Mary Celeste rudderless? Did she still pocket the additional salary when Acting in the Bodycoat shoes?

Well, that is the good old Attorney-General’s Department for ya!

At Public Trustee, history seems to have its umbrella caught in the revolving door.

How many Inquiries now?

DISTRICT COURT 2004.
My little effort at the Equal Opportunity Tribunal.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/sa/SAEOT/2004/1.html

GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATION UNIT, COMMENCED DECEMBER 2005

SAPOL ANTI-CORRUPTION INVESTIGATION 2006

MOSS INQUIRY. 12 MONTHS. A DISCIPLINARY INQUIRY INTO ALLEGATION AGAINST A SENIOR, NOW-EX PUBLIC TRUSTEE OFFICER.

THE PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY OF 2009.

We can but wonder what other story will be next to pop up in the media.

She is a sick little puppy that now-relocated Government Agency. Rann sold off the Franklin Street building to his mate in Spain not long ago.

We can but wonder what could be next.

Just a quick one though. Being from Belfast and having worked there during The Troubles, I know what to do when a bomb threat rips though the switchboard.

I remember we all gathered in Victoria Square, by the book, and the then Public Trustee Cath O'Loughlin strolled up. She asked; 'Anyone want to go back in, go throught the floors, and see if anything looks out of place?'

As I stood there staring at the big red trucks surrounding 25 Franklin Street, I thought about.....which planet!

Federal Election. If I was one of the Independents.

What a bloody circus this election has become. Sitting around, day after day, waiting to find a winner, a new or a recycled Leader.

OK. The circus idea has gripped my imagination. So, what would be my wish list to sling at Julia and Tony?

FUNDING FOR BEER DRINKERS.

The BDs of this nation have been ignored for way too long. Not unlike those fortnightly payments for bubs, I would like to see a couple hundred appear into my forever empty account, every fortnight, only to be used for going to the pub.

Consider the benefits. Guaranteed employment for all those hot chicks behind the bar. SAWater making a killing supplying crap Adelaide water to Coopers Brewery as beer production goes in to orbit. Then there are the hossies. Gambling will shoot right through the bloody roof. Those cheques from Lotteries Commissions to horsepistols will breed like bunnies. I can see new wards sprouting up everywhere with names such as The Guinness Ward.

A YEARLY TRAVEL ALLOWANCE.

The Pensioners get tossed a couple of tickets for free train travel each year. Hey, let’s expand that service. Just before Christmas, mail out Five Thousand Buck Qantas Travel Vouchers. Why the polies ask? Here’s a stupid question for ya. Think you will be voted out at the next election? Hell no!!!

INCENTIVES FOR PROSTATE TESTS

I have gone to my doc several times lately for the ultimate sacrifice...an encounter with a sheathed finger and a blob of gel. Only to reappear with the knowledge that my ears were clear. You know those little cardboard gauges you get to measure the circumference of your ring finger? How about a Prostate Incentive Kit that includes one for the doctor. Get to the surgery, line up all the docs, and whack all their fingers through that little bad boy. The teeniest weeniest one gets the honours. Include a voucher for a couple of pre-inspection pints at the local, and you are set. Thwack Thwack, bring it on big fella.

POLITICIANS ANNUAL AWARDS.

Bugger the Logies. This would be more fun. Consider these. The Lost in Space Award to Penny Wong. Or the Hogans Heroes I Know Nothing Award to Mike Rann. How about the Federal Golden Dagger Award to...well, nuff said. Yeah, and a travel voucher, a beer voucher, a flag inn voucher. Sweeeet.

As for South Australia? Well, our Premier has again bolted overseas. We have discovered that Fred’s Fish and Chip Shop is more likely to draw the ire of SafeWork SA than the government-run desal plant would. And porn is alive and writhing throughout the Public Trustee computer network.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSMpmxP4h8U

Never a dull moment.

Is this what Premier Rann means by transparency and accountability?

What is wrong with a Government that will not reveal the findings of multiple investigations into a government agency, an agency that serves the people of South Australia, the Office of the Public Trustee? An Agency that manages assets totalling in excess of ONE BILLION dollars.


Supreme Court awards for the injured. Monies bequeathed by Wills. Dollars invested by mums & dads.

Sure, there was a Parliamentary Inquiry back in 2009, and the Statutory Authorities Review Committee tabled its bi-partisan findings last November of 2009.

However, what about the findings of the SAPOL anti-corruption branch. The findings of the eighteen-month investigation by the Government Investigation Unit. The findings of the nearly-one-year-long Moss Inquiry.

Investigations and Hearings that cost you, the taxpayer, well in excess of one, maybe two million hard-earned dollars.

If asked, a spokesperson will more than likely direct you to the Parliamentary Inquiry report, a report available for perusal and download on the Parliamentary website.

You will be told that the Moss Inquiry rendered a guilty finding with regard to the Public Trustee executive against whom workplace bullying and corruption allegations had been levelled.

NEVERTHELESS, and I emphasis the NEVERTHELESS, I can state, with absolute first-hand authority, that a truckload of paperwork is buried somewhere in 45 Pirie Street, paperwork dealing with much more than workplace bullying.

Let us face it. Public Trustee is a source of income for the Government. From the fees and interest it makes, a dividend is returned to Treasury, every financial year. It only makes sense that irrespective of all matters, protection of this very public South Australian institution is paramount.

So, what DON’T you know?

Well, this is where I tread the very, very thin white line. My logs do record some very intensive scrutiny of my Blog from behind a firewall located within the Attorney-General’s Department at 45 Pirie Street. I am sure there are people there that would love to rope me up & stretch me out a further six inches.

I myself witnessed and reported on incidents that I, as a layman, thought, if proven, would be criminal. I reported these to the Government Investigation Unit during its lengthy investigation. I was interviewed before that by Attorney-General Department staff, only to be subsequently reminded of the law of libel and the law of slander.

I repeated my allegations to the Moss Inquiry. I repeated my allegations to the Parliamentary Inquiry.

So, what happened? I do not have a bloody clue. And, unless there is a hidden cache of pages within the Parliamentary Inquiry tabled report, I can only assume the worst.

I look back on my years of whistleblowing, and I honestly do wonder if it was worth anything. Certainly not for me. I do not have a job now. Even though I had a written guarantee from the CEO of Public Trustee that my position would be protected during the investigations, I was shown the door...redundant, position gone thank you!

Employer of the year.

I am positive there has been a cover-up.

I am in Court next Monday on a personal matter in relation to the State Superannuation Fund and my entitlements. I am seeking information from these findings. And having knowledge of the allegations over the years, I know that what I seek is relevant.

One can but wonder what argument Crown Law will concoct for Monday morning. No doubt, a technical argument.

I guess the Premier’s renewed commitment to transparency and accountability was left in the magazine pouch on the plane!

Where is the Ministerial Response to the Public Trustee Inquiry report?

On 1 December 2009, the fifty first report of the Statutory Authorities Review Committee, the final report of the Inquiry into the Office of the Public Trustee, was tabled in the Legislative Council of the South Australian Parliament.

In accordance with Section 19 of the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991, ministers are required to respond to the Committee’s reports within four months of tabling. Ministers are required to include in their response statements:

(a) which (if any) recommendations will be carried out and the manner in which they will be carried out; and

(b) which (if any) recommendations will not be carried out and the reasons for not carrying them out.

Ministers must cause a copy of their response to be laid before the Legislative Council within six sitting days after it is made.

On 26 May 2010, nearly 2 months late, a response was tabled. However, where is it?

I can tell you where it is not...on the Committee's web page. Neither is the Public Trustee Inquiry Report, the 51st Report. It was there, not now. Everything else is still there.

Maybe someone has just...forgot. After all, it seems to work for the Treasurer.

And I did contact the Committee last month with this query, but I guess they forgot too!

Any ex-members of SuperSA out there?

I am looking for any ex-members of SuperSA who had problems with accessing insurance payouts due to pre-existing conditions.


I have been working my way through the District Court with an Appeal to the Disciplinary and Administrative section. The Hearing is scheduled for late August.

If you know of anyone who was in a similar situation, by way of either the District Court or the SuperSA internal appeal process, I would appreciate hearing from him or her.

There is a question on the form that asks the Member to detail any medical condition in the past that may render the applicant disabled in the future...yeah, I know, a tough question when you are not a medical expert!

Anyway, I fell foul of this little gem, and need to know if anyone else has had a similar experience, particularly if the SuperSA Board (or by District Court appeal) reversed the decline decision on Appeal.

Independent Commission Against Corruption. A Mike Rann smokescreen!

In a recent article, Attorney-General John Rau is quoted as saying he believed proponents of a local ICAC “have so far made a very poor case”.

I can but wonder to what proponents he has heeded. Certainly not me, and I am the poster boy for all that is wrong with the present system.

Starting with a single complaint in March of 2000, my anti-workplace bullying and corruption campaign devoured 10 years of my life, as I ducked and weaved my way through a myriad of sometimes overlapping investigatory bodies within the Justice Department. The crowning glory was a 2009 Parliamentary Inquiry, but not even that publicly unearthed the more licentious shenanigans of the government agency in question.

At one particular point I was dealing with four discrete bodies: the Government Investigation Unit, the Equal Opportunity Commissioner, the anti-corruption branch of SAPOL, and the state Ombudsman. Oh yes, and there was the Crown Solicitor’s Office, Workplace Services, Workcover, the Commissioner for Public Employment, and there were more!

My dear Mr Rau. Had I been able to take my early suspicions to a body other than one of the government’s own, just maybe I would not have suffered through years of torment and illness. Your system DOES NOT WORK. In particular, you CANNOT investigate yourself.

And don’t insult the people of this state with that worn old diatribe about a national ICAC. This party room smokescreen fools no one.

(Submitted to The Advertiser, 14 May 2010)